I am no expert, but I don't believe that the bit about Fenghuang dancong and Wuyi yancha being the same varietal (and that it originally came from the Fenghuangshan area) is universally agreed upon. You can see one other take at:http://tea-obsession.blogspot.com/2008/ ... -wuyi.htmlPersonally, I'm not inclined to take Hojo's word on this one, but I'd be interested to see more research backing up this statement (or, for that matter, more research backing up anyone's thoughts on this).

I don't know if anyone can prove conclusively that one came from the other, which area started making oolong style tea first, etc. But given the number of legends about this, and given that there is some debate, even among "experts", I don't know that anyone can state conclusively that they are right.

While the exact meaning of 'dancong' (either historically or in contemporary usage) is also a matter of debate*, I think the point that there are teas from the Phoenix Mountain area that are not dancong and that there may be so-called "dancong" teas (by some definitions of the term) produced elsewhere is well taken.

[Disclaimer: I am not a historian, native Chinese speaker, or tea expert. I am not taking any sides, nor trying to revive old flamewars. Just trying to point out that there are a lot of points of view on this subject, even among folks who have been drinking and / or selling tea for quite some time]

While I have nothing but respect for all the vendors mentioned in this thread, it is unfortunate that most of the English language tea knowledge we're able to get access to comes from vendors. Even the best-intentioned vendors still have to make a living, and, conveniently, what they are selling often goes along with their point of view.

I agree that it's important to be aware that many tea questions have many possible answers but don't have conclusive answers.

One frequently cited line of evidence about origin time of Dan Cong is a letter written by Su Shi, one of the most famous poets and artists in Chinese history (top 3, IMO ), to thank his friend for his tea gift. In his time (Song dynasty), his good friend, a Chao Zhou resident sent him some Wuyi tea, which was regarded as the most precious gift at that time. This leads people to believe in Su Shi's time, Chao Zhou didn't have tea production. Otherwise, why would his friend (a tea connoisseur) send him Wuyi tea instead of Chao Zhou tea? Besides, there are many records about how Wuyi tea (not oolong yet) was adored throughout Song dynasty, but no such early record about Chao Zhou tea. Based on this, many people inferred Wuyi tea production started earlier than Chao Zhou tea.

But there can hardly be any evidence about sources of tea tree varietals. Any random Joe in Song dynasty could have pulled out a tea seedling from Guang Dong, or elsewhere, and took it to Wuyi, and that seedling could have become a famous tea tree. Did that happen? How can we know?

But anyway I don't see why that matters to tea drinking and don't see how history study can help a vendor sell tea.

gingkoseto wrote:But there can hardly be any evidence about sources of tea tree varietals. Any random Joe in Song dynasty could have pulled out a tea seedling from Guang Dong, or elsewhere, and took it to Wuyi, and that seedling could have become a famous tea tree. Did that happen? How can we know?

But anyway I don't see why that matters to tea drinking and don't see how history study can help a vendor sell tea.

Some people need to fill their heads with all kinds of information, Gingko. This has little to do with actually drinking tea. But, in terms of selling product, information is how most people buy things. It's a form of seduction and used very effectively in societies. What I admire about Hojo is he actually takes the time to involve himself with the people and processes they use to make the products he sells. So, if you ever have a technical question about something he sells, he usually can answer it completely.

History is something that cannot be relied on as it is the product of the mind's of men, a very dubious instrument that interprets and twists, rewrites, revises, and, sometimes fabricates what happened for all kinds of purposes.